Jump to content


Skill based match making


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

MachoMan_GroovySavage #21 Posted May 31 2019 - 19:37

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 87449 battles
  • 196
  • [BRT] BRT
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011


H0D0R_ #22 Posted May 31 2019 - 19:38

    Captain

  • Players
  • 17339 battles
  • 1,887
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    09-30-2013
Yeah... with sbmm I'd have to wait 5-10 minutes in queue to get into a match.

doomsdaymachine1 #23 Posted May 31 2019 - 19:41

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 19867 battles
  • 85
  • [RB4TH] RB4TH
  • Member since:
    10-27-2013
The landslide losing is pretty hilarious. I'l be the last of 3 tanks to die or the last 3 to survive consistently. I miss the days of old when close toss ups actually happened.

Devil__Anse #24 Posted May 31 2019 - 19:42

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 1810 battles
  • 748
  • [HSOLO] HSOLO
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013

I call BS on the 50% w/r SBMM thing.  At least the kind that most people talk about...picking 30 and splitting the players.  I have a very hard time accepting the "randomness" of a queue with 200 players in it resulting in the team stacking with the frequency it happens.  we all are on both sides equally...I'm not into tinfoil..but this MM isn't random.  there is some monetary benefit to them or it wouldn't be set up that way.  you'll never convince me otherwise

 



XVM_Ad_Astra #25 Posted May 31 2019 - 19:46

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 19478 battles
  • 524
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    04-06-2012

View PostSgt_King_Gunner, on May 31 2019 - 10:24, said:

Just like everyone wants a 50% win rate.

 

Which is what a real skill based matchmaker would achieve.  Make every battle a 50% chance of win for everyone.  

I wonder how many people who call for skill based matchmaker want what it would actually achieve?  Or how many have actually thought it through to realize that it would achieve 50% WR.

How many people who are now winning 60% or more of their battles would pay to lose more often?

 

then how does skill-based ranking system work for literally every other game?

diego999 #26 Posted May 31 2019 - 19:59

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 35946 battles
  • 5,246
  • [ACA-T] ACA-T
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010

View PostXVM_Ad_Astra, on May 31 2019 - 15:46, said:

 

then how does skill-based ranking system work for literally every other game?

 

Similar games? War Thunder doesn't use it. Armored Warfare used it briefly, realized it didn't work, then removed it.

 

What other 15v15 games are you talking about?



Volcanic_lobster_220 #27 Posted May 31 2019 - 20:36

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 8199 battles
  • 805
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

Easy solution: make it required to have 45% win rate before you can play Tier 8+ tanks :trollface:

That should keep the blowouts to the low tiers :P



vonkevin #28 Posted May 31 2019 - 21:46

    Captain

  • Players
  • 30650 battles
  • 1,165
  • Member since:
    08-08-2011

Tired of seeing all the blues & purples on the enemy team & all the reds & yellows on your team?

 

Simple solution - Uninstall XVM = Problem solved.



__WarChild__ #29 Posted May 31 2019 - 22:16

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 31561 battles
  • 5,669
  • [OPIC] OPIC
  • Member since:
    06-03-2017

View Postvonkevin, on May 31 2019 - 14:46, said:

Tired of seeing all the blues & purples on the enemy team & all the reds & yellows on your team?

 

Simple solution - Uninstall XVM = Problem solved.

 

Yes, let's hide the truth because ignorance is bliss.  

 

The game I posted was a landslide blowout as you could see.  I, however, felt great about my contribution because I did all I could given the circumstances.  I would have been angry with the blowout and I mean angry at my team if I didn't realize they were as clueless as that team appeared.  Instead, I just moved on to the next game after taking yet another screenshot for posterity sake.



__WarChild__ #30 Posted May 31 2019 - 22:17

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 31561 battles
  • 5,669
  • [OPIC] OPIC
  • Member since:
    06-03-2017

View Post455_hero, on May 31 2019 - 11:50, said:

 

That's so the "red" guys can learn the game faster! I'm sure the stat/chart guy can explain why you're looking at this wrong. Thx for sharing!

 

Thanks for taking a screenshot of my post.

ez_money #31 Posted May 31 2019 - 22:47

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15818 battles
  • 1,648
  • Member since:
    10-23-2011

View PostSgt_King_Gunner, on May 31 2019 - 11:24, said:

Just like everyone wants a 50% win rate.

 

Which is what a real skill based matchmaker would achieve.  Make every battle a 50% chance of win for everyone.  

I wonder how many people who call for skill based matchmaker want what it would actually achieve?  Or how many have actually thought it through to realize that it would achieve 50% WR.

How many people who are now winning 60% or more of their battles would pay to lose more often?

 

I don't completely disagree, but think about how much closer the battles could be and/or how many more close, hard fought contests it could produce. But it'll never happen, so moot point.

SquishySupreme #32 Posted May 31 2019 - 23:36

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 3639 battles
  • 664
  • Member since:
    10-29-2018
Once again, WR is not statistically valid if you are playing random battles as the data is completely randomized every single game.  You cannot compute a statistic based off of a single set of data with three random variables in it.  It's simply bad math and shocked me when I first saw it being used to equate player skill.  But what do I know - I mean, my father is only a professor who has taught statistics for 20+ years...

WIN8 is more valid to show skill, but they don't use it for MM, and it greatly favors longer term players as everyone's initial grind is horrid and premium vs non premium accounts play vastly differently due to how fast crew skill is gained and how much premium ammo you can afford per match.  What WN8 should be based on is only your last 1000 battles.  Your current skill level.

That said, they should do a final re-shuffle of the teams so it at least tries to put some skilled players on both teams.  I don't run any mods, but even I can tell when it puts 3 Churchills on one team and everyone has clan tags in their names - and ours has 2 and a bunch of KV1s that it thinks are actually heavies.  Going to be a rough match-up for sure.

455_hero #33 Posted May 31 2019 - 23:49

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 23780 battles
  • 474
  • [4HIM3] 4HIM3
  • Member since:
    11-12-2013

View Post__WarChild__, on May 31 2019 - 16:17, said:

 

Thanks for taking a screenshot of my post.

 

My pleasure

 



hazmatman #34 Posted May 31 2019 - 23:51

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 15260 battles
  • 700
  • Member since:
    04-19-2015

 

 

View Post__WarChild__, on May 31 2019 - 19:21, said:

 

I just like to point out that the single biggest factor in your winrate is the MM. Skill will allow you to increase your % by a certain limited amount, but without MM giving you the opportunity to win, you won't.  This is just a fact.  There's no reason to get all up in arms about it.  I'm sure you're a good tanker if you're reading this and your skill is superior.  But I watched an uber unicum with 3 marks on every Tier X the other night lose 3 games in a row.  He plays vanilla, so there was no way to see what the match ups were - but it made me smile seeing him get so angry at various things. Misery loves company I guess...

 

Not exactly sure where in my post I am "all up in arms" about anything. Nor do I recall disagreeing with anything in your post, in fact I made a point of saying so...and you quoted me doing it. Nor did I, by mentioning I play vanilla, make any inference that using XVM is some kind of sin or anything...hell, I'd use it but I play on a Mac using a wrapper so I avoid any mods to prevent issues.

 

XVM is currently a mod. If I could run it, I would. It would be very helpful if expect a key player in a key tank - like maybe our only heavy or light, to perhaps do something critical. folks with higher XVM might just have higher skill crews, better vision, faster reloads, and yeah I might even expect them to also look at the team makeup and say "I am the only LT, I can safely get some spots here and still retreat to cover, not lose hp, stay alive". Instead of seeing that light go sit behind arty or go dive off a cliff. Or say I wanted to push an opposing player or if I expected a friendly to back me up...or even might be helpful when a push is warranted but the only one willing is already passing me, at light speed, saying in chat "Follow Me Haz"...I might have just a touch more confidence if he/she was green of better in XVM especially if there are still lots of unspotted tanks. Oh yes, I'd love to use XVM.

 

But as for SBMM, I still think based on the fact no other game like this does it, trying to solve this issue everyone is concerned with, will simply create new ones. 

 

BTW, random should never be construed with fair. Look at nature. Lots of random, little of what most people consider fair, but a human's judgement of what is fair and what is not is highly subjective, and that is because virtually everyone internalizes and personalizes the perceived unfairness, as you said you saw an uber unicom 3 MOE player lose his c-r-a-p after dropping several matches in a row. Clearly a good player, has some level of skill. Still life in WoT seems unfair at that particular point...especially when you consider we all opt into this game and can opt out at anytime. Continuing to voluntarily play a game you feel is inherently unfair literally reeks of a potential mental disorder...just saying.

 

So does the algorithm purposely mismatch teams to reduce match times and thus allow players to conduct more matches per server hour (and as a consequence, in their frustration, spend money on gold and Premium tanks in the vain attempt to increase their success)? Maybe.

 

If so, does anyone here really think some posts on this forum will change a foundamental profit-making stratagem that is making them millions when while so many complain...they continue to play???

 

And so...where does that leave us?

 

Best thing I ever heard WG offer was to segregate noobs from experienced players in low tiers, skills aside. If you were sub-1K matches and playing in tiers I think 1 through 3, you were in a sequestered community. Remember, back around the time of the old Province map (about the same time they restricted it to low tiers, IIRC). They said this new method would kept out seal clubbers. This would allow players to learn fundamentals, assuming they made the attempt to do so (and didn't just free xp right into a tier 5 so they could get deleted by OI Exp's, watch their rounds bounce harmlessly off Sherman Jumbos, or get shredded by invisible E25 cockroaches). Granted WG's efforts in tutorials were pretty piss-poor back then but I guess they did not see much ROI on such development ventures at the time. I don't know whatever happened to that idea, if WG implemented it and then quietly dropped it or what.

 

 


Edited by hazmatman, May 31 2019 - 23:56.


Nixeldon #35 Posted Jun 01 2019 - 00:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 60821 battles
  • 2,115
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011

View PostXVM_Ad_Astra, on May 31 2019 - 13:46, said:

 

then how does skill-based ranking system work for literally every other game?

Literally every other game doesn't have it. Many MMO's that do have a PVE or alternate game play option. Many games using SBMM have different formats, use smaller teams, lack the tier progression, have lower randomness altogether, etc. Many of these games have a higher amount of lopsided matches than WOT and have no shortage of [edited], complaining and whining on their forums and others about the negatives of SBMM.

 

AW had the same format as WOT and tried making SIMM work for a long time before scrapping it altogether.


Edited by Nixeldon, Jun 01 2019 - 14:03.


__WarChild__ #36 Posted Jun 01 2019 - 03:09

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 31561 battles
  • 5,669
  • [OPIC] OPIC
  • Member since:
    06-03-2017

View Posthazmatman, on May 31 2019 - 16:51, said:

Not exactly sure where in my post I am "all up in arms" about anything. Nor do I recall disagreeing with anything in your post, in fact I made a point of saying so...and you quoted me doing it. Nor did I, by mentioning I play vanilla, make any inference that using XVM is some kind of sin or anything...hell, I'd use it but I play on a Mac using a wrapper so I avoid any mods to prevent issues.

 

I'm sorry about my wording.  I originally was talking to you but those statements you refer to where a general shout out to the folks reading this.  Wasn't meant specifically for you by any means.  I was agreeing with you in my own way.  Sorry about that.  My bad (I haven't been feeling well recently and I'm very tired).  Please forgive.



hazmatman #37 Posted Jun 01 2019 - 21:00

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 15260 battles
  • 700
  • Member since:
    04-19-2015

View Post__WarChild__, on Jun 01 2019 - 03:09, said:

 

I'm sorry about my wording.  I originally was talking to you but those statements you refer to where a general shout out to the folks reading this.  Wasn't meant specifically for you by any means.  I was agreeing with you in my own way.  Sorry about that.  My bad (I haven't been feeling well recently and I'm very tired).  Please forgive.

 

No worries.

RichardNoggin_dy07 #38 Posted Jul 23 2019 - 00:01

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 34380 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    02-16-2013

There is a very easy fix for this.. it wouldn't piss off anyone( yeah right)

just a simple 2 groups.  group 1  red/orange players.  group 2 everyone else.

maybe make the sbmm selectable in settings for those who like the lopsided teams

maybe allow group1 players go 2 group 2 by platoon only, MAYBE

maybe allow group 2 of drop into group 1 battles( seals that get clubbed will cry) so limit this amount/team


 

all im saying is 2 groups   that wont affect any one's que tiomes at all there are plenty of sheeters  to make up group 1 teams  and I think the majority of group 2 wont mind a few extra seconds to build the teams,,

 

 

 

 

 

 

oh yeah ..

one last thing..   " is not beating a dead horse if it never existed in the first place.. don't be a liberal smarty pants "


Edited by RichardNoggin_dy07, Jul 23 2019 - 00:03.


_Tsavo_ #39 Posted Jul 23 2019 - 00:57

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 45840 battles
  • 19,507
  • [BRVE] BRVE
  • Member since:
    02-16-2011
I've yet to encounter a reason for me to support SBMM or a benefit I'd get from it. 

leeuniverse #40 Posted Jul 23 2019 - 09:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 38646 battles
  • 8,005
  • [LAMP] LAMP
  • Member since:
    01-30-2013

View PostH0D0R_, on May 31 2019 - 11:38, said:

Yeah... with sbmm I'd have to wait 5-10 minutes in queue to get into a match.

 

Not true at all...

 

So, say the Que selects their players, SBMM would simply be placing a similar # of similar skilled players on each team equally, instead of one side get's 2 Unicorns, 5 blues and the other side is mostly Greens.

BTW this is done by Player Rating, NOT Winrate.

 

View Postdiego999, on May 31 2019 - 11:59, said:

Similar games? War Thunder doesn't use it. Armored Warfare used it briefly, realized it didn't work, then removed it.

 

What other 15v15 games are you talking about?

 

Armored Warfare didn't work because they did it by Winrate.  Winrate is the worst way to balance teams, because Winrate can be highly varied due to various factors, such as types of tanks most played, etc. etc.

They should have done it by Player Rating which is more accurate of "skill".  Also, I started playing AW after they had already removed it, so I can't remember now how else they balanced, but a proper SBMM is simply balancing each side with a similar # of similar skilled players.

 

So, AW did it wrong, which is why it didn't work.

 

View Post_Tsavo_, on Jul 22 2019 - 16:57, said:

I've yet to encounter a reason for me to support SBMM or a benefit I'd get from it. 

 

I don't know HOW you haven't seen my posts on the subject, especially when I know you have.

Here are some of the "benefits" off the top of my head.  ( I may be forgetting some things)

 

1. More games will last longer.  This will allow various classes to contribute more when before games would be over quicker, such as slower tanks, tanks that have to play more conservative, Arty players not getting their allotment of food, etc.

2. Will reduce Steamrolls.

3. Games being longer will allow tanks to engage in more strategy's, going to different positions, etc. etc.

4. Ultimately it will help create a more balanced and enjoyable experience for more people more of the time, reduce frustrations etc.

The game will start becoming more like an actual "battle" instead of WHAM and your games over, but the below will allow that more.

 

I'm tired, likely forgetting some things.

 

Anyway, now to be clear, SBMM is only going to be PART of what's necessary to most effectively balance things out to be enjoyable.

 

Skill-based MM won't do enough, it will only have a small effect by itself.  Other things need to be done to further balance games, i.e. eliminating the Quick Death and reducing Steamrolls.

HP Levels of tanks Tripled (this increases survivability and thus creating more variety of battle conditions instead of WHAM! and your games over).  (not to mention it lessens Arty hate)

Remove Gold Rounds

- Tank classes only have a 7% power difference between tiers in Armor, Pen, Damage, HP... (In other words you would face a tank of the same class that would be no more than 14% more powerful than you)

Max Damage is 700, and it's mainly TD's that do it.

Arty Max Damage be 300 to any tank (though arty would be more accurate so it's finally enjoyable to play)

1 Arty per side (but with the high HP, 2 or 3 might be livable, though I would prefer max 2 if we have to have more than 1, arty would also be buffed in other ways Speeds better, be given Sniper mode)

- Increase Acceleration (to help avoid be shot as easy)

- Lower RNG and Improve Gun Performance

Remove Stun

Repair/Heal Recharge takes too long, should be 60 sec's not 90.  (also, those things are damaged way to easy, that needs to be reduced)

etc.

 

There are other things, I have posts on this here on Skill-Based MM and Balancing the game more:

http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/571912-response-to-thoughts-on-skill-mm-by-a-wg-lead-developer/

http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/589603-do-you-like-an-unbalanced-game-and-like-not-enjoying-it-consistently/

 

Let's say the "average" of ALL of the ABOVE is 3-5% in contributing to reducing "steamrolls" and/or the quick death?  (there was like 12 per the above threads)

Then fixing them all would reduce steamrolls anywhere between 36%-60%.

 

Do you all think that wouldn't make a HUGE difference in game quality of life?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users